Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: brewcrew87 Date: Aug 25, 2008 10:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

it seems like most people hate anything post halloween 91, but i think that garcias playing was more proficent and sounded better then anything since the late 80`s


whats everyones opinion of 93- the most underrated year for the dead

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: stratocaster Date: Aug 26, 2008 8:19am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

1993 definitely has some great moments and some very good shows...1993 is certainly better than 1992, 1994 or 1995. Remember Garcia had another health renaissance in late 1992, dropping weight, engaging in a more holistic life style, at least for a time...some shows feature some top notch Garcia playing...I saw 4 shows in 1993 and had a great time at all of them...the Fire and Playin from Cal Expo, the He's Gone and Terrapin Jam from Deer Creek, the Standing on the Moon from Autzen, the Morning Dew from Richfield, the great show with David Murray...the band could still get it done, albeit not as much as in the 80s...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Aug 26, 2008 8:35am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

I'm one of those firmly in the camp that anything post-'91 is extremely hard to defend on any kind of objective, honest scale.

Garcia's voice is 99% of the time like a frog in a blender and listening to the toy-piano sound Vince plinks out is akin to trying to get a nutritious meal from a stick of cotton candy. Then there are songs like "I will take you home", "samba in the rain", and "Picasso Moon" that make me reach for the air sickness bag every time I hear them.

and yet.....every once in a while something pops up that is pleasantly surprising. I in fact was mesmerized by a REALLY GOOD China>Rider from--of all years--1994 that I heard just the other day (my apologies for not remembering the exact date; but it came up as part of the recent discussion on best "...wish I was a headlight" verses sung by Jerry)...so you never know.

If anyone can point to a specific '93 show that's worth my time, I thank you in advance. But overall, my guess is you can pick out a good song in a show from '92-'95 here and there, but great overall shows--there really is no such animal.

Still, as always, I quote from Seymour Skinner, back-pedaling after he blurts out in front of the students at Springfield Elementary that they "have no future", and they stare at him in horror:

"Prove me wrong, kids...prove me wrong."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: stratocaster Date: Aug 26, 2008 8:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

09-22-1993, 05-26-1993, 05-27-1993, 08-21-1993 and maybe 06-22-1993 are my pick today for the five best 1993 shows...these are the most consistent...

Garcia's voice in 1993 could be pretty bad at times, but no worse than Good Ol' Cap'n Puddin' Throat of 84-89...

We all know Vince was the worst, but as long as stayed out of the way and did something to blend in, things were allright...a song like Ramble on Rose he did very well on actually, but he downright could ruin a groove in Scarlet Begonias...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: lobster12 Date: Aug 25, 2008 11:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

not a big 93 fan, especially with Garcia switching to the acoustic sounding guitar. However today's day in history at shoreline has a pre-drums segment that is pretty great for any year.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: the_full_monte Date: Aug 25, 2008 12:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

When placed in context against the rest of the band's career, I think the years '92 to '95 are pretty much one giant toliet, although there are a few semi-diamonds littering the sewage. Nothing mind-blowing but a few nice half-sets or somewhat interesting jams. Overall, though, I find these years incredibly depressing, even when set next to to such poorly regarded (by many) years as 1984 and 1986.

Of course, I will likely be torched now by the small percentage of forumites who can't stand the slightest bit of harsh language directed at any era, but whatever- I stand by my assessment (and quite honestly I've never come across anyone willing to zelously defend those bleak final years who did not attend the majority of their shows during that time).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: lobster12 Date: Aug 25, 2008 12:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

The only thing I would disagree with is your assessment of 1984. While not a great year overall, I think there are tons of great moments with fantastic setlists.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: sunmonster Date: Aug 25, 2008 12:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

As has probably been stated before, you could have an incredible time at a show even when the band didn't play well (e.g.: I'm sure at least one person had fun in Boreal Ridge). I toured a bunch '83 to '93, and had plenty of great experiences in the 90s. Summer '92 was simply wonderful, albeit with some larger, more unruly crowds than previous.

That said, there is rarely a time I'm listening to a post-Brent show where I won't wonder, "Why am I bothering with this?" Even the most highly regarded shows (e.g.9/10/91 MSG) will have an annoyance like Vince ruining tunes at just the wrong moment (I know he was a nice enough guy and all, but jeez, why did he have to play that inappropriately loud sax sound (a la the album) during the Estimated Prophet jams?, etc.).

So again, the Dead were definitely worth seeing at various points in the 90s, but I don't feel that these shows are worth listening to again, especially with all the other great years out there.

Exception: two great things about '93 that we didn't have in the Keith or Brent eras: So Many Roads and Days Between.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: noodlejam Date: Aug 25, 2008 3:13pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

I saw the August Shoreline and Winter San Diego and LA shows of '93. I remember thinking that all of the shows lacked a certain focus - part of it was the sound of Jerry's guitar, which lacked intensity, both playing-wise, and sound-wise. They were fun shows, no doubt, but all of them missed the x-factor. Disclaimer: I think Vince sucked.

The Oakland shows in early '94, on the other hand, had a bit more intensity, even though I still cry about the fact that Jerry punted when the rest of the band was ready and willing to break out Cosmic Charlie.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rastamon Date: Aug 25, 2008 3:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

there is one throwback PITB from 1993 that eeeven the grate one, Cliff, enjoyed - and that is....

http://www.archive.org/details/gd93-05-26.sbd.georges.1958.sbeok.shnf

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: lobster12 Date: Aug 25, 2008 5:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

A fantastic PITB. Probably the last great one and the best since 12/90 Oakland.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rastamon Date: Aug 25, 2008 6:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

oh GRATE! another excellent PITB I don't have....12/30 I presume? well...off to shnflac or bt.etree i go.
will it ever stop????

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: patkelleyPA Date: Aug 25, 2008 3:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

I've always thought that '93 was a great year, and many other do too. It was sort of a resurgence because Garcia was temporarily off the smack and newer songs were breaking out with some regularity. As far as it being the "most" underrated year, I have to disagree and go with '88. No one ever talks about '88s, and they were playing at almost the same level in that year as they were in '89, which everyone's all over (including me).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: staggerleib Date: Aug 25, 2008 11:01am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 1993 was a very good year for the dead

I personally loved '93, though I skipped touring. A very large percentage of the stuff I've pulled down from that year is great. I had told myself, after Soldier Field, '92, that I was done. There was nothing left for me as an audience member for the Dead. I would have seen Jerry any time, though.

I did go to the soldier field, '94 to see the Traffic opener. But by this time, the crowds had gotten so large and unruly, disrespectful, and generally unpleasant, that I didn't have any desire to see any more. So much different than my early start in May of '77.

Oh well, I find myself wishing that I'd seen more of these two years, who knew?